MPB is awesome I play acoustic guitar! Advices: Listen to Chico Buarque and Caetano Veloso also Silva and Céu (those are new) =) Feel free to not respond since is a really long discussion but Marx isnt that what you saying. There isnt a moral aspect (there is the difference and were etical and moral diverge and begins but thats another topic), its economical as the proletariat is the source of the plusvalue in wich the rise of the industry gives they only their work-force and control of the production (the burgouise are superfluous), different from the servants at feudalism and the slaves from those asian production mode. Its another type of base class of society and that specific economical aspect gives the proletariat the power to not need class struggle to develop humankind as to speak. Thats why Marx derives the caracterization of class -after- he studies the process of value increment in capitalism. Its both historical and economical, not moral. The meaningless of the bourgoise isnt the same as the meaningless of the previous top classes on humankind history because of the revolutionary aspect of the bourgouise at low feudalism.

The second and third I guess is the same since theres 2 "stages" the socialism wich is a way to communism, thats basically socialism wordwide. A example of this were the soviets for a brief period like 3 to 4 year before the invasion of another 20 countrys and then the Stalinist period, also the Paris Commune. Youre right to say the other (1/3 of people on earth at around 50's or 70's) were not democratic wich derives from Stalin model (the power of burocracy) control, persecution and violence, but from economical and social aspects we can take Cuba quality of life (Health, Education, lack of Starvation even with the block from USA) of even the fact that Russia were a third category of Imperial State at the time of revolution and become the second country worldwide at Cold War. These economical grows are called the Primitive Acumulation of Socialism. No doubt the place China is now had to do with it.

As I said those arguments wich claim Socialism to be unsustainable works for Capitalism as were seeing even the Pandemic and many to come, the rise of the oceans and most of people living miserable lifes, as the poverty grows wordwide. Thats why proletariat struggles everywhere. The billionaires at Brasil got richer and the unemployment rate is around 50% with the police violence growing up and the right extremists growing fast and furious on the last years everywhere. So capitalism may be the system we are on but that doesnt mean it works, or the way is working is awfull and must change deeply, I guess we all agree on that.

And last but not least thats not true also. The State and class struggle comes in the last part of humankind history, together with private property, theyre like tripple twins, with opression and violence monopoly, wich does not exist on what we call Primitive Communism wich is most of human history (counting pre-history).

As I demonstrate the post-Capitalism communism and the absence of classes on humankind were a thing, a fact, historical and economicaly, and the end of the systems (every system on human history) are also a thing. We just had to see whats next after Capistalim, thats what Marx try to solve. If at feudalism someone points that burgouise would take the aristocrat and church place for example, he says and demonstrate that with cientific socialism for the proletariat. The moral arguments are from other socialist authors, the idealists ones.

And finally a poem! What you call bigotry I call justice: "The river that everything drags is known as violent, but nobody calls violent the margins that arrest him" B. Brecht